DOCSLIB.ORG

Philosophy 2011

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Philosophy 2011 Philosophy 2011 press.princeton.edu contents 3 princeton foundations of contemporary philosophy 4 general interest 12 princeton monographs in philosophy 14 history of philosophy 18 aesthetics 19 moral & political philosophy 26 mind, language, science & logic 28 søren kierkegaard 29 isaiah berlin 30 of related interest Forthcoming PaPerback With a new afterword by the author the expanding circle e, thics evolution, and moral Progress Peter singer “Singer’s theory of the expanding circle remains an enormously insightful concept, which reconciles the existence of human nature with political and moral progress. it was also way ahead of its time. it’s wonderful to see this insightful book made available to a new generation of readers and scholars.” —Steven Pinker, author of The Blank Slate and The Stuff of Thought “The Expanding Circle is a brilliant book whose significance becomes clearer every year. Peter Singer was the first major philosopher to see the importance of the new Darwinian insights into human nature, and in this book he applies them with characteristic power and grace.” —robert Wright, author of The Moral Animal What is ethics? Where do moral standards come from? are they based on emotions, reason, or some innate sense of right and wrong? For many scientists, the key lies entirely in biol- ogy—especially in Darwinian theories of evolution and self-preservation. but if evolution is a struggle for survival, why are we still capable of altruism? in his classic study The Expanding Circle, Peter Singer argues that altruism began as a genetically based drive to protect one’s kin and community members but has developed into a consciously chosen ethic with an expanding circle of moral concern. Drawing on philosophy and evolutionary psychology, he demonstrates that human ethics cannot be explained by biology alone. Rather, it is our capacity for reasoning that makes moral progress possible. Peter Singer is the ira W. Decamp Professor of bioethics in the University center for human Values at Princeton University and Laureate Professor at the University of melbourne. June 2011. 200 pages. Pa: 978-0-691-15069-7 $17.95 | £12.50 b • category Forthcoming neW Braintrust s oul Dust Whatn euroscience tells Us about morality t he magic of consciousness Patricia s. churchland nicholas Humphrey “this is a terrific, clear, and finely sensitive ac- “Justs a fairy dust sprinkled on the mundane count of human moral and social behavior and world turns it to gold, soul dust converts animal its neurobiological—and decidedly secular— flesh into the enchanted world of sensation and underpinnings. Patricia churchland once again self-consciousness. the result is illusion, but the leads the way.” illusion in which we live. this challenging and —michael S. gazzaniga, author of Human: The original book combines scientific rigor and exqui- Science Behind What Makes Your Brain Unique site sensitivity to the thoughts of philosophers, poets, writers, religious thinkers, and humanists. a “Few areas of science are as relevant for the delightful and thought-provoking tour de force.” future of humanity as the science of morality, —Simon blackburn, author of Think: A Compelling and few scholars are as prepared to comment Introduction to Philosophy on its current status as Patricia churchland. She has exactly the right background to carve out how is consciousness possible? What biological an original approach to the problem, and the purpose does it serve? and why do we value it skills needed to lead the reader to solid new so highly? in Soul Dust, the psychologist nicholas facts while being merciless with exaggerated humphrey, a leading figure in consciousness claims and sloppy thinking. Braintrust is vintage research, proposes a startling new theory. con- churchland, only better.” sciousness, he argues, is nothing less than a mag- —antonio Damasio, author of Descartes’s Error ical-mystery show that we stage for ourselves inside our own heads. This self-made show lights What is morality? Where does it come from? and up the world for us and makes us feel special and why do most of us heed its call most of the time? transcendent. Thus consciousness paves the way in Braintrust, neurophilosophy pioneer Patricia for spirituality, and allows us, as human beings, to churchland argues that morality originates in the reap the rewards, and anxieties, of living in what biology of the brain. She describes the “neuro- humphrey calls the “soul niche.” biological platform of bonding” that, modified by evolutionary pressures and cultural values, has nicholas humphrey has held posts at oxford and led to human styles of moral behavior. The result cambridge universities, and is now professor is a provocative genealogy of morals that asks emeritus of psychology at the London School of us to reevaluate the priority given to religion, economics. absolute rules, and pure reason in accounting for 2011. 256 pages. 17 halftones. 1 table. the basis of morality. cl: 978-0-691-13862-6 $24.95 | £16.95 Not for sale in the Commonwealth (except Canada) Patricia S. churchland is professor emerita of phi- losophy at the University of california, San Diego, and an adjunct professor at the Salk institute. a pril 2011. 256 pages. 1 halftone. 11 line illus. cl: 978-0-691-13703-2 $24.95 | £16.95 b • category press.princeton.edu 1 neW not for Profit Why Democracy needs the humanities Martha c. nussbaum “[n i] advocating educational curriculums that recognize the worth of personal development and creative thought, this slim book is itself a small but decisive step in the effort to broaden and enrich current pedagogical practices.” —Publishers Weekly martha c. nussbaum is the ernst Freund Distinguished Service Professor of Law and ethics in the Philosophy Department, Law School, and Divinity School at the University of chicago. The Public Square 2010. 184 pages. cl: 978-0-691-14064-3 $22.95 | £15.95 Forthcoming neW o n the currency of egalitarian A Political Philosophy in Public Life Justice, and other essays in civic republicanism in Zapatero’s Spain Political Philosophy José Luis Martí & Philip Pettit G. A. cohen “this is an exercise all too rare in contemporary edited by michael otsuka political philosophy, as Philip Pettit takes up the challenge to apply, develop, and sharpen his “g. a. cohen argues brilliantly for two important ideas about the republican tradition while evalu- and unfashionable ideas: that accidental inequal- ating the performance of the first government of ity is unjust and that poverty limits freedom. Spain’s José Luis rodríguez Zapatero. This book cohen’s essays reveal a wonderful mind in search does a very good job of drawing direct connec- of the fundamental truths about justice. here tions and revealing elective affinities between you have the mix of clarity and depth that marks Pettit’s neorepublican political theory and the philosophy at its apex.” trajectory of Zapatero’s politics both in route to —Joshua cohen, Stanford University and in government.” at the time of his death, g. a. cohen (1941–2009) —casiano hacker-cordón, centro de estudios held the Quain chair in Jurisprudence at Univer- Políticos y constitucionales, madrid sity college London. michael otsuka is professor José Luis martí is associate professor of law at of philosophy at University college London. Pompeu Fabra University in barcelona. Philip 2011. 288 pages. 4 tables. Pettit is the Laurance S. rockefeller University Pa: 978-0-691-14871-7 $24.95 | £16.95 cl: 978-0-691-14870-0 $85.00 | £59.00 Professor of Politics and human Values at Princ- eton University. 2010. 216 pages. 1 line illus. cl: 978-0-691-14406-1 $29.95 | £20.95 2 Princeton Foundations of contemporary Philosophy s cott soames, series editor this is a new series of state-of-the-art books, written by leading experts, about major areas of active research in contemporary philosophy. Providing high-level introductions for students and fresh perspectives for researchers, these books present new, unified visions of their subjects, from their recent history and leading themes to their most exciting new developments and most important unanswered questions. neW Forthcoming Philosophy of Language truth s cott soames Alexis G. Burgess & John P. Burgess “ sthis i a masterpiece. Scott Soames’s work on “Surveying an important and much-discussed these topics defines orthodoxy in contemporary field, and balancing the nature and logic-and- philosophy, and having that work distilled into a paradox sides of truth in an easy-to-grasp fash- single volume is enormously valuable.” ion, this book is a major achievement. it is easily —Jeff Speaks, University of notre Dame the best first step into truth studies available, but also an excellent short review for experts.” Scott Soames is professor of philosophy at the —Jc beall, University of connecticut University of Southern california. 2010. 200 pages. 4 line illus. alexis g. burgess is assistant professor of phi- cl: 978-0-691-13866-4 $21.95 | £14.95 losophy at Stanford University. John P. burgess is the John n. Woodhull Professor of Philosophy at neW Princeton University. Philosophy of Law a pril 2011. 176 pages. 1 table. cl: 978-0-691-14401-6 $22.95 | £15.95 Andrei Marmor “this superb book, written by one of the world’s Also by John P. Burgess foremost philosophers of law, is a highly wel- neW come addition to the jurisprudential literature, Philosophical Logic one marked by its immense pedagogical value and scholarly excellence.” “this is an excellent little book, and deserves —W. J. Waluchow, author of A Common Law wide success.” Theory of Judicial Review —alasdair Urquhart, Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews andrei marmor is professor of philosophy, mau- rice Jones Jr. Professor of Law, and director of the Philosophical Logic addresses students new to center for Law and Philosophy at the University logic, philosophers working in other areas, and of Southern california.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Beaneyanalyticphil Historyphil.Pdf
    King’s Research Portal DOI: 10.1007/978-1-137-30487-2 Document Version Peer reviewed version Link to publication record in King's Research Portal Citation for published version (APA): Beaney, M. (2013). Analytic Philosophy and History of Philosophy: The Development of the Idea of Rational Reconstruction . In E. Reck (Ed.), The Historical Turn in Analytic Philosophy (1 ed., pp. 231–260). (History of Analytic Philosophy). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-137-30487-2 Citing this paper Please note that where the full-text provided on King's Research Portal is the Author Accepted Manuscript or Post-Print version this may differ from the final Published version. If citing, it is advised that you check and use the publisher's definitive version for pagination, volume/issue, and date of publication details. And where the final published version is provided on the Research Portal, if citing you are again advised to check the publisher's website for any subsequent corrections. General rights Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the Research Portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognize and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. •Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the Research Portal for the purpose of private study or research. •You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain •You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the Research Portal Take down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact [email protected] providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim.
    [Show full text]
  • Ba Philosophie; Weltanschauung
    BA PHILOSOPHIE; WELTANSCHAUUNG Personale Informationsmittel Michael OAKESHOTT Politische Philosophie 09-1/2 Michael Oakeshott / Edmund Neill. - New York ; London : Con- tinuum, 2010. - X, 143 S. ; 22 cm. - (Major conservative and li- bertarian thinkers ; 8). - ISBN 978-0-8264-2178-4 : £ 65.00 [#1001] In recent years, the English philosopher and political thinker Michael Oakeshott has become the subject of a growing body of critical work and discussion. Numerous monographs on various aspects of his thought have been published.1 It is a sign of the vitality of Oakeshott’s thought that no agreement has been achieved about how best to characterize it. Thus, scholars often emphasize one particular aspect of Oakeshott’s thought to the neglect of others. He is regarded as a skeptic, as a conservative, as a critic or as a defender of modernity, as a political philosopher. Oakeshott's oeuvre is peculiar in that his publications consist mostly of essays and merely two book-length monographs which also do not follow the usual pattern of heavy footnoting. Among recent introductions to Oakeshott’s work the latest addition comes from Edmund Neill who offers a succinct, balanced and therefore valuable account of the major elements of Oakeshott’s thinking.2 His book appears in a series about conservative and libertarian thinkers which, according to se- ries editor John Meadowcroft, „aims to show that there is a rigorous schol- arly tradition of social and political thought that may be broadly described as ‚conservative’, ‚libertarian’ or some combination of the two“. This is indeed a very valuable aim and highly to be commended, as book series explicitly devoted to conservative thought as a serious intellectual enterprise are few and far between.
    [Show full text]
  • The Method of Antinomies: Oakeshott and Others Others and Oakeshott Antinomies: of Method the VOLUME 6 | ISSUE 1 + 2 2018 6 | ISSUE VOLUME
    University of South Florida Scholar Commons Philosophy Faculty Publications Philosophy 2018 The ethoM d of Antinomies: Oakeshott nda Others Stephen Turner University of South Florida, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarcommons.usf.edu/phi_facpub Scholar Commons Citation Turner, Stephen, "The eM thod of Antinomies: Oakeshott nda Others" (2018). Philosophy Faculty Publications. 309. https://scholarcommons.usf.edu/phi_facpub/309 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Philosophy at Scholar Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Philosophy Faculty Publications by an authorized administrator of Scholar Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Method of Antinomies: Oakeshott and Others STEPHEN TURNER Email: [email protected] Web: http://philosophy.usf.edu/faculty/sturner/ Abstract: Michael Oakeshott employed a device of argument and analysis that appears in a number of other thinkers, where it is given the name “antinomies.” These differ from binary oppositions or contradictories in that the two poles are bound to- gether. In this discussion, the nature of this binding is explored in detail, in large part in relation to Oakeshott’s own usages, such as his discussion of the relation of faith and skepticism, between collective goal-oriented associations and those based on contract, and between a legal regime based on neutral rules and one oriented to policy goals . Other examples might include Weber’s distinction between the politics of intention and the politics of responsibility. Moreover, such ambiguous concepts as “rights,” have antinomic interpretations. In each of these cases, the full realization of one ideal led, in practice, to consequenc- es associated with the other: in political practice, neither polar ideal was realizable without concessions to the other.
    [Show full text]
  • Immanuel Kant Was Born in 1724, and Published “Religion Within The
    CHAPTER FIVE THE PHENOMENOLOGY AND ‘FORMATIONS OF CONSCIOUSNESS’ It is this self-construing method alone which enables philosophy to be an objective, demonstrated science. (Hegel 1812) Immanuel Kant was born in 1724, and published “Religion within the limits of Reason” at the age of 70, at about the same time as the young Hegel was writing his speculations on building a folk religion at the seminary in Tübingen and Robespierre was engaged in his ultimately fatal practical experiment in a religion of Reason. Kant was a huge figure. Hegel and all his young philosopher friends were Kantians. But Kant’s system posed as many problems as it solved; to be a Kantian at that time was to be a participant in the project which Kant had initiated, the development of a philosophical system to fulfill the aims of the Enlightenment; and that generally meant critique of Kant. We need to look at just a couple of aspects of Kant’s philosophy which will help us understand Hegel’s approach. “I freely admit,” said Kant , “it was David Hume ’s remark [that Reason could not prove necessity or causality in Nature] that first, many years ago, interrupted my dogmatic slumber and gave a completely differ- ent direction to my enquiries in the field of speculative philosophy” (Kant 1997). Hume’s “Treatise on Human Nature” had been published while Kant was still very young, continuing a line of empiricists and their rationalist critics, whose concern was how knowledge and ideas originate from sensation. Hume was a skeptic; he demonstrated that causality could not be deduced from experience.
    [Show full text]
  • The Method of Antinomies: Oakeshott and Others Others and Oakeshott Antinomies: of Method the VOLUME 6 | ISSUE 1 + 2 2018 6 | ISSUE VOLUME
    The Method of Antinomies: Oakeshott and Others STEPHEN TURNER Email: [email protected] Web: http://philosophy.usf.edu/faculty/sturner/ Abstract: Michael Oakeshott employed a device of argument and analysis that appears in a number of other thinkers, where it is given the name “antinomies.” These differ from binary oppositions or contradictories in that the two poles are bound to- gether. In this discussion, the nature of this binding is explored in detail, in large part in relation to Oakeshott’s own usages, such as his discussion of the relation of faith and skepticism, between collective goal-oriented associations and those based on contract, and between a legal regime based on neutral rules and one oriented to policy goals . Other examples might include Weber’s distinction between the politics of intention and the politics of responsibility. Moreover, such ambiguous concepts as “rights,” have antinomic interpretations. In each of these cases, the full realization of one ideal led, in practice, to consequenc- es associated with the other: in political practice, neither polar ideal was realizable without concessions to the other. But these features are rooted in the deep history of institutions. They are contingent, not philosophical. They nevertheless preclude con- ventional approaches to political theory. Keywords: Michael Oakeshott, antinomies, meta-politics, democratic theory, Max Weber, Hans Morgenthau, genealogy 54 COSMOS + TAXIS COSMOS Several of Michael Oakeshott’s writings, including On vision of politics is different from relativism in any simple Human Conduct ([1975] 1991), employ an argumentative sense of this term. It is specifically distinct from, and op- device that is shared with several other twentieth century posed to, the idea that there can be an ideological “solu- thinkers, but which has not received much attention on its tion” to the antinomies in question.
    [Show full text]
  • Albert Schweitzer: a Man Between Two Cultures
    , .' UNIVERSITY OF HAWAI'I LIBRARY ALBERT SCHWEITZER: A MAN BETWEEN TWO CULTURES A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE DIVISION OF THE UNIVERSITY OF HAWAI'I IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS IN LANGUAGES AND LITERATURES OF • EUROPE AND THE AMERICAS (GERMAN) MAY 2007 By Marie-Therese, Lawen Thesis Committee: Niklaus Schweizer Maryann Overstreet David Stampe We certify that we have read this thesis and that, in our opinion, it is satisfactory in scope and quality as a thesis for the degree of Master of Arts in Languages and Literatures of Europe and the Americas (German). THESIS COMMITIEE --~ \ Ii \ n\.llm~~~il\I~lmll:i~~~10 004226205 ~. , L U::;~F H~' _'\ CB5 .H3 II no. 3Y 35 -- ,. Copyright 2007 by Marie-Therese Lawen 1II "..-. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS T I would like to express my deepest gratitude to a great number of people, without whose assistance, advice, and friendship this thesis w0l!'d not have been completed: Prof. Niklaus Schweizer has been an invaluable mentor and his constant support have contributed to the completion of this work; Prof. Maryann Overstreet made important suggestions about the form of the text and gave constructive criticism; Prof. David Stampe read the manuscript at different stages of its development and provided corrective feedback. 'My sincere gratitude to Prof. Jean-Paul Sorg for the the most interesting • conversations and the warmest welcome each time I visited him in Strasbourg. His advice and encouragement were highly appreciated. Further, I am deeply grateful for the help and advice of all who were of assistance along the way: Miriam Rappolt lent her editorial talents to finalize the text; Lynne Johnson made helpful suggestions about the chapter on Bach; John Holzman suggested beneficial clarifications.
    [Show full text]
  • Oakeshott Revisited
    Prepared for „Workshop on Conservatism“, 6‐7 November 2014, University of Zurich, Ethics Centre, Zollikerstr. 117 (ZOB‐E‐2), 8008 Zurich, Switzerland CONFERENCE DRAFT – Do not cite without permission of the author Christoph M. Michael, Martin‐Luther‐Universität Halle‐Wittenberg, Philosophische Fakultät I, Institut für Politikwissenschaft 06099 Halle (Saale) Germany [email protected]‐halle.de Oakeshott Revisited Beyond nostalgia In 1992, almost two years after Michael Oakeshott’s death and nearly one after the posthumous publication of an enlarged edition of his 1962 collection of essays Rationalism in Politics, Perry Anderson expressed his disconcertment and even surprise over how little public notice Oakeshott’s passing received. After all, to Anderson Oakeshott had been “the most original thinker of post‐war conservatism” and “one of the quartet of outstanding European theorists of the intransigent Right whose ideas now shape – however much, or little, leading practitioners are aware of it – a large pail of the mental world of end‐of‐the‐century Western politics.”1 To those sympathetic to the first part of Anderson’s sentiments it must have seemed disparaging if not outright degrading that Oakeshott’s conservatism should be classified as an “oddly fearful quasi‐hedonism” a mere decade and a half later.2 Prove was being offered in form of the perhaps most widely quoted passage of Oakeshott’s work: 1 Perry Anderson: The Intransigent Right at the End of the Century. In: London Review of Books, Vol. 14, No. 18 (September 24, 1992), pp. 7‐11. Complementing the quartet are Carl Schmitt, Leo Strauss and Friedrich von Hayek.
    [Show full text]
  • Michael Oakeshott 'On Being Conservative'
    Podoksik, Ephraim. "Michael Oakeshott ‘On Being Conservative’." Conservative Moments: Reading Conservative Texts. Ed. Mark Garnett. London: Bloomsbury Academic, 2018. 67–74. Textual Moments in the History of Political Thought. Bloomsbury Collections. Web. 2 Oct. 2021. <http://dx.doi.org/10.5040/9781350001565.ch-009>. Downloaded from Bloomsbury Collections, www.bloomsburycollections.com, 2 October 2021, 23:12 UTC. Copyright © Mark Garnett 2018. You may share this work for non-commercial purposes only, provided you give attribution to the copyright holder and the publisher, and provide a link to the Creative Commons licence. 67 CHAPTER NINE Michael Oakeshott ‘On Being Conservative’ Ephraim Podoksik The self- government of men of passionate belief and enterprise is apt to break down when it is most needed. It often suffi ces to resolve minor collisions of interest, but beyond these it is not to be relied upon. A more precise and a less easily corrupted ritual is required to resolve the massive collisions which our manner of living is apt to generate and to release us from the massive frustrations in which we are apt to become locked. The custodian of this ritual is ‘the government’, and the rules it imposes are ‘the law’. One may imagine a government engaged in the activity of an arbiter in cases of collisions of interest but doing its business without the aid of laws, just as one may imagine a game without rules and an umpire who was appealed to in cases of dispute and who on each occasion merely used his judgment to devise ad hoc a way of releasing the disputants from their mutual frustration.
    [Show full text]
  • Herder's Importance As a Philosopher1
    HERDER'S IMPORTANCE AS A PHILOSOPHER1 Michael N. Forster Introduction Herder has been sufficiently neglected in recent times, especially among philosophers, to need a few words of introduction. He lived 1744-1803; he was a favorite student of Kant's, and a student and friend of Hamann's; he became a mentor to the young Goethe, on whose development he exercised a profound influence; and he worked, among other things, as a philosopher, literary critic, Bible scholar, and translator. As I mentioned, Herder has been especially neglected by philosophers (with two notable exceptions in the Anglophone world: Isaiah Berlin and Charles Taylor). This 1 This title echoes that of an essay by Charles Taylor, "The Importance of Herder" (in Isaiah Berlin: A Celebration, ed. E. and A. Margalit [Chicago, 1991]), with whose thesis that Herder is an important philosopher I am in strong agreement. However, my arguments for this will for the most part be quite different from Taylor's. In particular, I do not follow, and would indeed strongly disagree with, Taylor's central claim that Herder's seminal contribution lies in his conception of Besonnenheit and of a related linguistic "rightness," as introduced in the Treatise on the Origin of Language of 1772, and that a whole family of further important and novel ideas somehow follows from that one. My title's addition of the qualification "as a philosopher" is not grudging in spirit but on the contrary flags the fact that Herder has claims to importance not only as a philosopher but also in several other disciplines.
    [Show full text]
  • Making the Premises About Constitutional Meaning Express: the Ewn Originalism and Its Critics Andre Leduc
    Brigham Young University Journal of Public Law Volume 31 | Issue 1 Article 13 11-1-2016 Making the Premises about Constitutional Meaning Express: The ewN Originalism and Its Critics Andre LeDuc Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.law.byu.edu/jpl Part of the Constitutional Law Commons Recommended Citation Andre LeDuc, Making the Premises about Constitutional Meaning Express: The New Originalism and Its Critics, 31 BYU J. Pub. L. 111 (2016). Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.byu.edu/jpl/vol31/iss1/13 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by BYU Law Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Brigham Young University Journal of Public Law by an authorized editor of BYU Law Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. LEDUC.MACRO.FINAL_3.DOCX (DO NOT DELETE) 3/1/2017 6:51 PM Making the Premises about Constitutional Meaning Express: The New Originalism and Its Critics André LeDuc*1 ABSTRACT Perhaps the hottest front in the half-century-old debate over originalism turns on the introduction of semantics, pragmatics, and other techniques from the philosophy of language and linguistic the- ory. While in some ways these arguments simply build on the now familiar distinction between interpretation and construction defended by the New Originalism, the newest of the New Originalists purport to break new ground in the debate. The originalists argue that they have rehabilitated originalism so as to avoid the criticisms that had been leveled against earlier versions, including those leveled against earlier versions of New Originalism. The newest critics argue that the sophisticated tools of linguistic philosophy, when properly ap- plied in their hands, offer new and decisive challenges to originalism, including the newest of the New Originalisms.
    [Show full text]
  • Soames on Ethics
    SOAMES ON ETHICS Thomas Hurka University of Toronto Though primarily focussed on philosophy of language, metaphysics, and epistemology, Scott Soames’s Philosophical Analysis in the Twentieth Century contains several discussions of ethics. Volume 1 contains two chapters on Moore’s ethics, one on the emotivism of Ayer and Stevenson, and one on Ross; Volume 2 adds a chapter on Hare’s prescriptivism. The bulk of the Moore chapters as well as the ones on emotivism and Hare concern metaethics, but there is also discussion of Moore’s normative views and the chapter on Ross is entirely normative. Since there is no material on ethics after Hare, the book concentrates on figures from the first half of the century. But there is much of interest in what it says about them. Soames discusses these figures without much reference to the recent literature on them or their philosophical problems, but his book is none the worse for that. Since ethics is not his main area of expertise, there are, not surprisingly, some historical inaccuracies, but they mostly concern matters of detail. On the larger issues he nicely picks out these philosophers’ most important ideas, even when they are not highlighted in their texts, and his criticisms go to the heart of those ideas; in several cases they are also novel. In this paper I will concentrate on an objection he raises against Moore’s ethics that connects to one of his book’s central themes. In his “Introduction” Soames identifies two main achievements of 20th-century analytic philosophy. One is the successful understanding of the concepts of logical consequence, logical truth, necessary truth, and a priori truth.
    [Show full text]
  • Machiavelli's Background
    chapter 1 Machiavelli’s Background 1.1 Machiavellism Sedulo curavi, humanas actiones non ridere, non lugere neque detestari, sed intelligere. baruch de spinoza, Tractatus Politicus i.4. Perhaps in a larger degree than any other political author in the last five hun- dred years, Machiavelli has been subject to a vast number of interpretations. So much has been written that in his book The Myth of the State, published posthumously in 1946, Ernst Cassirer struggled to trace the turbulent historiog- raphy of the Florentine author. In his study, Cassirer reminded us of how Machiavelli’s fortune has moved like a pendulum from one end of the interpre- tative spectrum to the other.1 His writings have suffered all kinds of vicissitudes – from periods of severe condemnation, which began almost immediately after his writings were published, to eras of veneration. There is no denial that what readers have understood as “Machiavellism” has taken a great variety of forms over the years. The first period of censure was initiated in France and continued in England during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries.2 It began after the 1 Cassirer, The Myth of the State, p. 116. For a more updated historiographical study see, Isaiah Berlin, “The Originality of Machiavelli;” Giuliano Procacci, Machiavelli nella cultura europea dell’età moderna (Rome: Laterza, 1995) and Davide De Camilli, Machiavelli nel tempo: la crit- ica machiavelliana dal cinquecento a oggi (Pisa: Edizioni ets, 2000). 2 For more on the reception of Machiavelli’s writings see, Sidney Anglo, Machiavelli: The First Century: Studies in Enthusiasm, Hostility, and Irrelevance (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005) and Brian Richardson, “The Prince and its early Italian readers” in Niccolò Machiavelli’s The Prince: New Interdisciplinary Essays, ed.
    [Show full text]